Jeffrey Rosen recounts the history of the Supreme Court through the personal and philosophical rivalries that have transformed the law—and by extension, our lives. With studies of four crucial conflicts—Chief Justice John Marshall and President Thomas Jefferson; post–Civil War justices John Marshall Harlan and Oliver Wendell Holmes; liberal icons Hugo Black and William O. Douglas; and conservative stalwarts William H. Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia—Rosen brings vividly to life the perennial rivalry between those justices guided by strong ideology and those who cared more about the court as an institution, forging coalitions and adjusting to new realities. He ends with a revealing conversation with Chief Justice John Roberts, who is attempting to change the court in unexpected ways. The stakes, he shows, are nothing less than the future of American jurisprudence.

Download and start listening now!

bdky

Listener Opinions

by Catherine | 2/20/2014

" I absolutely loved this book, but I am a supreme court junkie. Others might not enjoy all the minutiae. "

by Zack Hemond | 2/16/2014

" I liked the comparative nature of this book. "

by Ashley (cnthrdlywt2bwz) | 2/14/2014

" I put this down about two or three years ago and am just now getting back to literally, the last 40 pages. It was not as good as The Nine by Jeffrey Toobin. "

by Tracy Ewens | 2/8/2014

" Excellent. I love the behind the scenes look. It's hard to imagine such icons as human being and this book really give you that. "

" This is a particularly bad book. It is poorly written and very ideological. The more right wing the Justice the better they are in this book. "

Thomas | 1/17/2014

" Rosen emphasizes the difference between doctrinaire judges who try to impose their personal legal philosophy on the court and those who try to build consensus on the court, coming down firmly on the side of those judges who compromise their views for the sake of majority or unanimous decisions. He picks out pairs of justices whose personalities and philosophies contrast in a way that seems suspiciously contrived, as if they acted as they did to satisfy Rosen's thesis. It's almost as if Rosen is demonstrating what is wrong with imposing personal belief on the court by doing it in his book. Strange. If you can get over this contrivance (or better yet, ignore it) it's still a well written and entertaining book, particularly if you are unfamiliar with some of the more colorful characters in Supreme Court history. "

Robert | 1/14/2014

" Billed as the companion book to the PBS series on the supreme court. I found it very interesting. The author juxtaposes personalities on the court and compares their effectiveness. Technically the fisrt paring is not two justices but Jefferson and Marshall. "

" I wonder what non-lawyers might get from it. They wouldn't understand my little Mona Lisa smile through the Harlan/Holmes wars, the commerce clause battles, and so forth. "

Andrew | 12/1/2013

" read-2007 "

Cory | 11/25/2013

" My Favorite book on the Supreme Court. It focuses on Justices whose proper temperment impacted court history. "

Dan Duran | 10/28/2013

" Geared more towards academia than the casual reader, still provides an interesting look at what happens when judicial philospiphies collide. I found the section contrasting Justices Black and Douglas particularly interesting. "

Mark | 11/28/2012

" Good enough about rivalries and the lives of these pivotal justices (and 1 President)- John Marshall-Thomas Jefferson, John Harlan-Oliver Wendell Holmes, William Douglas-Hugo Black; and William Rehnquist-Anthony Scalia "

Hope | 10/28/2012

" I'm a SC junkie. What can I say? "

Brandon Shultz | 10/27/2012

" This book did a great job of examining the evolution of the court through the pivotal times on the court by displaying the conflict between two justices and expanding it to look at the court as a whole. "

Amy Ondos pickett | 8/2/2012

" Even with the audiobook, I couldn't get through it. "

Margaret | 8/2/2012

" So far so good. Very enlightening about our justices. "

James | 3/6/2012

" Best book I have read in years. "

Crrrazyhawk | 11/16/2011

" Good insight into the supreme court, past and present. "

Delacey | 11/6/2011

" Not as good as The Nine or as The Metaphysical Club, but a really interesting take on jurisprudence and judicial temperament and how they've shaped the legacy of the Court "

Roy | 7/19/2011

" First book on the Court that helped me understand the politics of voting on cases. Very enlightning for me even though I thought I knew a lot about the court! "

Robert | 5/18/2011

" Billed as the companion book to the PBS series on the supreme court. I found it very interesting. The author juxtaposes personalities on the court and compares their effectiveness. Technically the fisrt paring is not two justices but Jefferson and Marshall.
"

Delacey | 5/22/2010

" Not as good as The Nine or as The Metaphysical Club, but a really interesting take on jurisprudence and judicial temperament and how they've shaped the legacy of the Court
"

Roy | 6/17/2009

" First book on the Court that helped me understand the politics of voting on cases. Very enlightning for me even though I thought I knew a lot about the court!
"

Catherine | 1/4/2009

" I absolutely loved this book, but I am a supreme court junkie. Others might not enjoy all the minutiae.
"

Mark | 12/18/2008

" Good enough about rivalries and the lives of these pivotal justices (and 1 President)- John Marshall-Thomas Jefferson, John Harlan-Oliver Wendell Holmes, William Douglas-Hugo Black; and William Rehnquist-Anthony Scalia
"

[ShoppingCartItemsAddedOnMerge] audiobook(s) were left in your cart from a previous visit, and saved to your account for your convenience. You may view or remove these audiobooks on the shopping cart page.